The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1887-10-08

and extension. Yet the Journal, with all
Its high protection infatuations, must be
able 20 see that as between trust" In
the modern Interpretation Of the term, and
a high protective tariff, there is but DIFF.
ference In name. VIVA. Is the difference,
for example, between trust 10 raise the
price OF coal, or high protective tariff on
on coal for the same purpose Let the
tariff on coal be removed, and free admis.
sion given 20 the sea Goals Of Nova Scotia
and the Northeast coast, and how long
could the present coal trust maintain
itself? So as 10 the lumber trust. Re
move the tariff on lumber, and Canada will
In month knock the pins from under any
lumber trust In this country that can be or
panized, besides immensely benefiting
our builders and farming population by
giving them cheap lumber, and vastly
benefiting the country at large by arrest
Ing the present most unholy and barbarous
destruction of our forests. Then there Is
the salt trust. AT present the whole salt
business of the country is under the con-
troll of the great Onondago salt monopoly,
its peculiar characteristics being shown by
the fact that while salt is sold in Chicago
a, 81 % TO S1.50 per barrel, the same salt Is
laid down In Montreal at so cts per Dbl,
AT the same time on Turks Island and
along the Brazil coast are mountains OF
the best salt In the world, offered at the
bare cost of handling, and which our ships
would gladly bring TO this country tree OF
charge as ballast but which can never
reach here on account Of the high protec-
tive tariff on salt, or, In other words, the
congressionelly constituted and legalized
salt trust.
And so we can 90 on and rid ourselves Of
the expressions of the glass trust, the rail
and half dozen of other iron trusts, the
starch trust, the wooden goods trust, and so
forth and so on, running into hundreds OF
these pernicious trusts,
1t is true, no doubt, that there are many
fourishing industries of this country that
need the fostering aid of tariff protection,
or, which is the same thing, of govern
ment bounties, but they are not the salt
producers, the lumber kings, the cotton
spinners, wooden manufacturers, or, except
10 an extent much below the present rate,
of the iron and glass manufacturers.
The plea that high protection in favor of
many of these massive, domineering and
!howling monopolies is necessary to keep
up the wages of labor in this country has
been abundantly demonstrated in these
columns by our exceedingly able cores,
pondents, "Bystander" and Professor
Boltwood. 10 be the sheerest and vilest
humbug. There can be no increase of
wages in this country through high tariff
aid as long as the manufacturing lords
have free trade in labor Indeed our cor
respondents have shown, by their irrefrPg.
able evidence of the consular reports made
10 our government, that in view of the
amount of work per day and per week
done by operatives in this country com
pared with operatives in the same line In
Europe, America TO day has the cheapest
labor in the world
here are, in the sense In which the
Journal, the Inter ocean and the whole
brood of the protectionphobist press OF
the day use the term, no free traders Cor at
least very few In this country. All par
ties admit, and in.their platforms invaria'
bly, proclaim, that tariff exactions should
be so levied as NOT only not to injure, but
to foster the industries OF the country
The difference between the attitude of the
Democratic and Republican parties on the
subject Is, that while the former would
favor such industries as really need gov
eminent aid, the latter party Is welded to
the strengthening and further building up
of our most monstrous monopolies, and &c
the maintanence to its fullest extent of the
foundation principle that underlles and
justfes and protects all the Journals exc
Grated abominable trusts